Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Our price is the same all day, but varies day to day. Yes there's a risk of high prices but it has never gone above SVR any time since I signed up. Last 30 days average 17.67p/kWh, max 20.67 and lowest was 11.83.  It saved just under £300 during 2023.  
    • It you had E7 in the past but have converted to single rate then the meter will still hold the last recorded Night readings. This introduces scope for error when manually reading. If the meter has only ever been used on single rate then there's only one figure that can be taken. For example ours shows "Rate 1" reading and a "Total import" reading, but they both give the sme figure. If it has ever been on E7 the total will be higher, including the retained night reading.
    • okay, perfect and thank you so much for the help once again. so firstly i am going to initiate the breathing space, during this time it's likely ill receive a default. when i receive the default are you aware of how long it will take for me to know whether the OC have sold it off to DCAs? Once it's with the DCAs i do not need to worry as they cannot issue a CCJ only the OCs can Even if i decide to come an arrangement with the DCAs no point as the default will remain for 6 years paid or not paid I should only consider repayment if the OC still won the debt and then issue a CCJ? Just to confirm the default will not be seen after 6 years? No one can tell I had one then after 6 years ill be all good?
    • I'm not sure we were on standard tariffs - I've uploaded as many proofs as I can for the ombudsman - ovo called last night uping the compensation to 100 from 50 pounds for the slip in customer service however they won't acknowledge the the problem them not acknowledging a fault has caused nor are they willing to remedy anything as they won't accept the meter or formula was wrong.   I'd appreciate more details on the economy 7 approach and I'll update the ombudsman with any information you can share. 
    • To re-iterate and highlight my urgent question on this one: The N24 from the court did not include any instructions to submit paperwork 28 days before the date, unlike the N157 received for other smaller claims. Do I have to submit a WS for this court date? Link has!...
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

First Plus - Lumping Interest Up Front on Settlement


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5358 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I'm new on here after being recommended by a friend.

 

Just wondering if anyone has had dealings with First Plus?

 

Its a long story, but basically, I took out a loan with them in 2006, and then after 24 months settled it early and my settlement figure was nearly £2,000.00 MORE than the initial loan that I took out. I had repaid them over £3,000.00 during the 24 months that I had the loan, which they seemed to have failed to take into account when calculating my settlement figure.

 

I have been fighting with them for over eight months and every letter they send back to me quotes different figures to what I actually signed up for.

 

Has anyone else had dealings with First Plus? They really are an absolute nightmare and I would advise anyone to stay well clear of them.

 

What are the chances of getting my money back?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of info will be found by googling firstpluscomplaints

 

If they used the Rule of 78, which they should not have then it is likely you were penalised too heavily.

 

Ask them for full disclosure on the s/f charge.

 

There are a lot of issues out there with FP and they are trading with difficulty at the moment so every penny gained from a customer is a penny less that they have lost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mark for your reply.

 

I will try what you have suggested as I am determined to try to get back some of my money. The initial loan was for £12,000.00 and I repaid over £3,000.00 over 24 months. When I asked for a copy of my settlement figure, they had lumped almost £39,000.00 up front for the interest! God knows where they had plucked this figure from as it is certainly not mentioned anywhere in my credit agreement.

 

They also fail to take into account my repayments of over £3,000.00 in their settlment figure.

 

I would never ever go near First Plus again and would advise anyone who is thinking of taking out a loan with them to think twice.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

How can I find out if my First Plus Loan was settled using the Rule 78?

 

I've checked all my paperwork, and the Agreement that was dated January 2006 (the date that I initially took out the loan) states that if I settle early then they will settle under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

However, when I received a letter last week asking how my settlement figure was calculated in February 2008, it stated they had calculated it based on the Consumer Credit Act (Early Settlement Figure) 2004.

 

Which one is correct? Does anyone know?

 

This is such a frustrating situation as from what I have read on this forum and other forums, First Plus really do like to rip people off. As stated above in my previous post, surely it is not correct that my settlement figure, after paying over £3,000.00 back to them over 24 months, was almost £2,000.00 MORE than the initial loan.

 

Where do I go from here? First Plus seem to have backed me into a corner with this one.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

First Plus are no longer offering loans, they are only surviving due to support from Barclays and are being investigated on many fronts ranging from the misselling of PPI to the fairness (or not ) of their interest rate clause. They have a provision of £8m in their accounts that they expect to have to pay to successful PPI complainees.

 

Re settlements, you are lucky in that your loan was regulated so they cannot do anything other than follow specific guidelines for settlement. Standard calculations would show ALL the interest due to the end of the loan then rebate what is allowable under the caluclation.

 

As you were relatively early in your loan in terms of settlement then it is standard in how interest is apportioned that you would not have cleared off that much capital in 2 yrs. That said, the settlement figure quoted does seem excessive. Have you spoken directly to them? Louisa Jane Hart is one of their remaining people and whilst she obviously tows the party line, it does not detract from her being able to help 02920905507 is her number. Ask for full statement and breakdown.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi All,

I have no direct involvement with FP but check out my thread called Swift advances PLC and in terms of nightmare early settlement calculations Swift make FP look like pussycats!

Swift do use the Rule of 78 ( I took my loan out in 2003) but this is being removed in May 2010 as part of an overhaul of the regulations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...